The biggest argument in favour of bigotry against gays and lesbians among certain religions and the non religous, is the fact that their sexuality is a matter of choice. They are, according to those who espouse this theory, born as men and subsequently choose to pursue an unnatural sexuality based upon some sort of sick perversion. This garbage now falls by the wayside.
I’d like to start by reiterating my previous viewpoint — that any bigotry is the real perversion. I don’t need scientific evidence to tell those with irrational hatreds against anyone different to them to seek help. Even if gays and lesbians were doing it by choice, then it is their right in any event, and to hate them for it is pathetic.
Now however, to condemn them is to fly in the face of the most basic of religious principles.
The scientific findings are now well known in the media. This from the Sydney Morning Herald:
“Scientists at the Stockholm Brain Institute in Sweden published findings offering fresh evidence that sexual orientation is hardwired into neural circuitry.
Brain scans reveal that homosexual men and heterosexual women have symmetrical brains, with the right and left hemispheres almost exactly the same size. Conversely, lesbians and heterosexual men have asymmetrical brains, with the right hemisphere significantly larger than the left. They also found that certain brain circuits linked to emotional responses were the same in gay men and heterosexual women.
The findings, published in the US journal Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, suggest biological factors influencing sexual orientation, such as exposure to testosterone in the womb, may also shape the brain’s anatomy. The study, led by the neurobiologist Ivanka Savic, builds on previous research that identified differences in spatial and verbal abilities related to sexual orientation. Tests have found gay men and heterosexual women fare better at certain language tasks, while heterosexual men and lesbians tend to have better spatial awareness.
Savic and her colleague Per Lindstrom used positron emission tomography to look at brain wiring, finding heterosexual women and gay men shared brain circuitry that links a region called the amygdala, which plays a key role in emotional responses, to other parts of the brain.
In heterosexual men and lesbians, the amygdala feeds signals directly into parts of the brain that trigger the “fight or flight” response, which Savic says is more physically active than the wiring seen in gay men and heterosexual women.”
It is fundamental to the main religions that man is created in the image of God with our Creator determining our make-up. If, as it now transpires that gay men and straight women are designed in the same way then, in line with this new evidence, they have been created in the same way in respect of their sexuality. Accordingly gay men have as much choice as women in their choice. To choose women, in accordance with this design would be unnatural.
The alternative is to suggest that God does not create humanity, or if he does, he somehow creates gays or straights on a Friday (depends which one you believe is the correct model). Which makes us what?
Children of a lesser God?
A Creator unable to design humanity, but rather one just sitting in judgement on individuals of the species?
The alternative is that God creates mankind, each individual and group special — the differences strengthening the race as a whole and a cause for celebration not hatred.
That is my God.
More disturbing is Ndumiso’s suggestion that in the future people can prescan their kids’ brains.
Will prolife homophobes suddenly become open to abortion? Or come up with wierd treatments? Many churches already run counselling to help turn gay people straight. But yeah, if God made the kid that way, then surely it is time to accept them as they are.
If being gay is biological, but the bible says that being gay is bad, does this prove that God does not exist?
OH dear, this is what happens when a person starts thinking, thought is dangerous I tell you, must go back to watching tv.
As a Maths Graduate, may I just object to the “proof” of differences in “Gay” brains on the grounds that statistically the sample group is too small to be statistically significant.
And there does not seem to be any cross sampling with any other racial/ sexual/ behavaioural/ social/ religious traits or behaviours that could possibly account for the differences.
In context may I point out that staistically there is proof of an “Etonian” gene that runs through the male line and involves the sons of old Etonians becoming Etonians themsleves.
And that at the turn of the century scientists found proof, in the shape of the skull that shaped the formation of the brain, that Africans had less well developed thought processes than Europeans.
If you look hard enough you can find scientific proof of anything you want, and statistics, samples, genetics and behavioural characteristics are notoriously prone to errors due to sampling methods.
Or misinterpretation of body chemistry or functions
“Savic’s team has yet to confirm whether the differences in brain shape are responsible for sexual orientation, or are a consequence of it. To find out, they have begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation. “These differences might be laid down during brain development in the womb, or they could happen after birth, though it could very likely be a combination of the two,” said Savic.”
Ah, a good fight waiting to start here, I see. Science and religion, fundamentalists on both parts, fence sitters and cynics abound in all six sides of this coin…
Okay – questions: Assuming the SMH article is correct and “gayness” is hard wired, can the same not then be postulated for:
1 – Transvestites – People who are sexually straight bul like to wear clothes of the opposite sex?
2 – Kinks – people who like to be tied up, spanked and whipped?
3 – Smokers – some people have their 1st puff at 8 and love it and smoke for 70 years, others never even try, or if they do, don’t care for it?
4 – Alcoholics – why do some people enjoy a few beers during a game while others use Vodka as a morning mouthwash?
5 – Bigots – it’s as “unnatural” to be gay as it is to be a racist. What if scientists prove that bigots are “hard wired” to hate others?
6 – Paedophiles – the people I feel most sorry for: if I am allowed to get my rocks off with my lady when she wears fishnet stockings, its okay, that’s a “natural” desire. But when a paedophile sees kiddie and thinks “yum” its criminal. And it should be if he ACTS on it – but is sexual desire hard wired, or is it a choice?
7 – etc. until number 1 593 246.
Answer: We will never know, and I’ll bet my ponytail that the article above will be disproven sometime in the future. It’s the weekly “coffee is good for you / coffee is bad for you” see-saw of “scientific findings” that contradict each other almost on a daily basis.
I don’t think there can be any fence-sitting on this at all – either you believe all human tendencies and behaviour is hard-wired and accept it, and you have to take the bad with the good. Or you believe that all behaviour and tendencies is a choice, and then you don’t have to take anything.
At the end of the day – it doesn’t matter if you are into science, religion, or somewhere in the middle. The fact is, each of us are different, and we have a right to be different. If you believe God made us unique, cool, if you believe out inherited DNA makes us different, that’s cool. The fact is we are different, and trying to find reasons (such as hemispherical brain sizes) for that difference is futile.
Conclusion: It don’t matter what you say, feel or do, just as long as you take full responsibility and accountability for your actions. Live and let live.
Traps
Please look at the Website for “The Gay and Lesbian Vaishava Association,Inc”
http://www.galva108.org/modernbio.html
What about the scientifically proven third sex – which has different body parts and different chromosomes to BOTH men and women! 1% of all populations are estimated to be third sex persons.
It’s all to do with genetic mutations, a mistake done by genes during their interaction. You have Guanine pairing with Adenine instead of Thymine, and that type of a natural selection evolved into a lot of defects, therefore it’s either defects are GOD’s intention or we have to live with them.
Is this a coincidence?
Are you hacking into my PC Traps? How did you know I was writing about this.
Fess up.
Logic dictates that research has always attempted to prove a hypothesis hence no result can be a 100% correct or incorrect for that matter. In essence no researcher can prove anything that involves God as a subject matter. Let us accept our human nature and the limitations that it comes with. Attempting to play God may lead to self inflicted self-destruction… (if you view this to be a hypothesis, research it RESEARCHER!!!)
@Alisdair Budd – and what are the statistical chances of 1 in 10 of the world population ignoring ‘god-given’ biological impulses because of perversion?
Even without the study the stats point to something significant and bilogical.
While I accept the scientific findings, what has been ignored is that in a heterosexual relationship, both parties have different brain structures. A more logical conclusion would be that gay men and women would make more likely sexual/life partners, as opposed to the given one that people with similarly structured hemispheres being attracted to each other sexually is a result of this phenomena (which of course, generally bollocks)
What about bi-sexuals?
Katse
These are not mutations or defects – they are different chromosomes. PLEASE learn the difference! Don’t you have ANY friends who are scientists or medical students who could explain to you the difference?
Ndumiso yo biscuit! I bet it’s because great minds think alike – look no further than that!
Traps and Ndums: Fools never differ! Jokes. Good post.
Todays Sports Leader – Were the All Blacks poisoned in 1995?
http://www.sportsleader.co.za/traps/2008/06/26/were-the-all-blacks-poisoned-in-1995/
This new evidence is irrelevant. What does it matter if they choose to become gay or are born that way. We should learn to tolerate gay people for who they are- it doesn’t matter if they chose to be that way or where born that way. Fundamentalists have no right to dictate the private lives of others.
@Lyndal
All variations in genes are due to a mutation at a point in time. This does not mean that a variation is “bad”, mutations are what produce all the variations you see. Many mutations turn out to be favourable and are selected for in time to become dominant.
@katse and Lyndall
Mutations in themselves would not be termed “defects”. We decide whether to term a gene “defective” if the mutation causes its gene product to cease to do its job, or do it defectively. Mutations can also cause genes to do their job better!
We are all the products of gene mutations and should be proud of it!
If you take the Bible out of religion, sanity might prevail. Most Christians worship the Bible all the while thinking they are worshiping God.
Science and logic have never stopped bigotry or religion before. They won’t stop either now.
The proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences was often called the “buddy journal” where members of the Academy have the privilege of publishing their own work or of their buddies about 6 times a year. So I am not sure how much that work is credible. Secondly, in the past a researcher also showed some scientific data to suggest that there is a genetic basis for homosexuality. Considering that the same researcher was gay raised ethical issues about that work and later it was found to be a scientific hoax. So let us wait for some more confirmation and clarity from new work before making sweeping conclusions. In the meantime, accept gays as being human, who deserve to be treated equally in all walks of life and it does not really matter whether there is a scientific reason for their sexual orientation. Gays need to be equally tolerant of the heterosexual and not be defensive and confrontational. Of course, bigots on either side have no place in the modern world.
Dear Craig,
In Ancient Rome and Greece almost 100% of rich men were bisexual “Let your thoughts turn to youths in summer and maids in winter”, so it was highly social and not thought of as perversion but normal and indeed “god Given”
And peadophilia was so encouraged that they built temples to it.
So anybody exclusively “Straight” was thought of as abnormal.
And I repeat: “The sample is too small to mean anything” since in a world of 3.5 Billion people approximately 93 samples is not enoguh to draw conclusions.
Especially when none of them were apparently South American, South East asian, chinese, INdian, Central asian and Philippina, but were mostly WASP, Blue eyed Blond Nordic types donated to the local hospital to where Savic works in Sweden.
Po
It is NOT genes- it is chromosomes! You are as bad as Katse. This is NOT DNA!
Lyndall I apologise, I do not mean to be rude, but I have a biology degree and chromosomes are our DNA. Our DNA, our genes, are wound up into very dense helices and structures, the final result being the tangle that is our chromosomes.
It doesnt matter though,you are right that it is to do with X and Y chromosomes, these contain our genes though
Teenage mutant ninja homos…teenage mutant ninja homos…etc etc…homo power!
Sorry, Katse’s comment got that one stuck in my brain. I want to know what the purpose of this research is? Does it make a fundamental difference to anyone’s life? I know absolutely buggery sod about science, but I am eternally fascinated by some of the studies that make headlines – weird stuff like fish affecting your libido, or chocolate eaters being more likely to go mad when they’re older (I made those two up). HOW do scientists get funding for that sort of research?
I think Gerry’s comment (somewhere right on top) is the most pertinent. After all is said and done (and lots will be!), after all “findings” are found and then reburied, and then found again, it is about responsibility and accountability for our actions.
* * *
Of more importance than trivial research findings which will be proved and disproved countless of times, there is a need for more reflexive thinking about the discourses we are (re)producing, and the reflection this has on society. The ever present discourse of needing to justify being gay as ‘normal’ or ‘not bad’ actually highlights how slowly we are progressing on the road to embracing (healthy) diversity. If we keep having these circular debates about science, religion, and sex, we will forever sustain these divided discourses, as opposed to normalising our talk and use of language in ways that are accepting of healthy sexual variation as a way of life.
Po
You have a biology degree! Great! I am working only on second hand information.
Please answer these questions for us:
If Life Itself was created either by God or by Nature, has ANYONE been able to create DNA or Chromosomes in a laboratory, and I don’t mean by cloning?
What explains homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom?
@ Lyndall
Now you are asking some serious questions that I probably cannot answer. Sadly.
I did not study zoology, but I am aware that there are many studies of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. The argument would have to be the same as for humans I guess. Iether it is God or it is our genes, or God gave us the genes.
As to making DNA in lab. Yes, fragments of DNA are made in labs.As far as I knew an entire synthetic chromosome has not been made, only DNA fragments and individual genes.
But I found this link that says an artificial chromosome has in fact been made:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/16/AR2007121601900.html
It is only a tiny bacterial chromosome, not a human one. Not sure about homosexual bacteria?
I hope someone better informed than me can fill in the details about your questions.
Imagine the furious debates that will break out once the details of that artificial chromosome are published next year: We can make our own genetic material, so will w e be able to distinguish between natural and artificial in the future? Life will take on new meaning I think.
You get two types of people, those who believe the facts and those who believe only those facts that fit their beliefs….
Read the below and judge with reason.
Twin Studies
Twin studies in their modern form investigate both identical and fraternal twins, but this article emphasizes studies of genetically identical twins, which are sufficient for our purposes.
Earlier studies mostly used informal or “snowball” samples of twins recruited from gay and lesbian associations, and by advertisements (e.g. 2,3). Such studies are possibly biased by the nature of twins who volunteer, but even so, if one identical twin was homosexual, only about half the time was the co-twin concordant (i.e. also homosexual).
Better research, however, was based on twins who were recruited for other reasons, and only subsequently asked about their sexual orientation. These are known as “registry” studies, and they similarly gave a concordance rate between identical twins of less than 50%. There have been two major published registry studies (4,5), one based on the Minnesota Registry, the other on the Australian Registry.
The larger of the two registry studies is the Australian one, done by Bailey, Martin and others at the University of Queensland. Using the 14,000+ Australian twin collection, they found that if one twin was homosexual, 38% of the time his identical brother was too. For lesbianism the concordance was 30%. Whether 30% or 50% concordance (snowball samples), all the studies agree it is clearly not 100%.
The critical factor is that if one identical twin is homosexual, only sometimes is the co-twin homosexual. There is no argument about this in the scientific community.
Interpretation
Identical twins have identical genes. If homosexuality was a biological condition produced inescapably by the genes (e.g. eye color), then if one identical twin was homosexual, in 100% of the cases his brother would be too.
But we know that only about 38% of the time is the identical twin brother homosexual. Genes are responsible for an indirect influence, but on average, they do not force people into homosexuality. This conclusion has been well known in the scientific community for a few decades but has not reached the general public.
Indeed, the public increasingly believes the opposite.
Identical twins had essentially the same upbringing. Suppose homosexuality resulted from some interaction with parents that infallibly made children homosexual. Then if one twin was homosexual, the other would also always be homosexual. But as we saw above, if one is homosexual, the other is usually not. Family factors may be an influence, but on average do not compel people to be homosexual.
Twin studies suggest that as a class, events unique to each twin–neither genetic nor family influences–are more frequent than genetic influences or family influences.
But many individual family factors (such as the distant father) are commoner than the individual unique factors. Unique events would include seduction, sexual abuse, chance sexual encounters, or particular reactions to sensitive events, when young. Everyone has their own unique path which only partly follows that of the theoreticians.
This is the scientific, politically incorrect facts. Just because one really wants something to be true, doesn’t make it so.
Po,
The debate is about gays (not sure if it’s a desirable result), hence I am talking about defects, and I know sometimes we have normal dominant genes (which are desirable) or recessive alleles (undesirable).
Lyndal
You’ve got no clue who you are talking to, and I am not going to divulge my background just to please you; try and be objective during discussions. If you missed a point seek clarity without being personal. Your students should come to me…
Katse
For as long as you think homosexuals are mutations I would send you no students!
Po
It that lab creation a new creation or a re-creation? Is it animal or vegetable? I really want to know.
An objective crtic
I never trust these tests on twins. There are so few twins, fewer that are homosexual, and even fewer that will submitt to psychological or other tests. I always question viability of sample size.
Even in my own Varsity studying Psychology days I questioned them – although in those days it was the Nature v Nurture debate. I sometimes think they made them up – where do you find so many twins who were seperated at birth?
Po, your efforts of trying to explain to Lydal what a monomer of a chromosome is, keeps on disappearing like fart in the wind.
Lyndal,
it’s so easy, when two(of curse helical) DNA strands are combined by a centrosome, the form a chromosome, now the monomers of a DNA are the ones that are prone to mutations, we are talking here about thymine, adenine, guanine and so on.
Now will you stop embarrassing yourself, as it is true that we are all the result of mutation?
Po, your efforts of trying to explain to Lydal what a monomer of a chromosome is, keeps on disappearing like fart in the wind.
Lyndal,
it’s so easy, when two(of course helical) DNA strands are combined by a centrosome, they form a chromosome, now the monomers of a DNA are the ones that are prone to mutations, we are talking here about thymine, adenine, guanine and so on.
Now will you stop embarrassing yourself, as it is true that we are all the result of mutation?
Katse
Well if we are all mutations – then who are the Third Sex people? The original “Adam” – both male and female – before God divided him into two. That would make both women and men the mutants!
As good a theory as any! Why not?
The point is people who are sexually different are PERSECUTED in fundamentalist countries. Words like “mutation” do terrible harm!
Lyndal,
It is unfortunate that we still have such fundamentalists on planet earth, as for Adam and Eve doctrine; did you know that the oldest Homo Sapient is Mrs. Ples from South Africa and not the Garden of Eden, that’s according to archeological findings?
Try reading some Darwin theory of evolution perhaps couple it a little bit of Big Bang theory and contrast that to Genesis type assertions; tell me which one carries more water.
Sorry, Lucy from around Ethopia would be the oldest (about 3 million years) and not Ples (about 2 million years ago.
Katse
Those are not the oldest – just the oldest DISCOVERED bones!